In light of the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York, the legalization of civil unions in Rhode Island, and after reading an article about an already-liberal couple fighting for same-sex marriage on behalf of their son, who is believed to be the first homosexual killed in combat since the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, I’m speaking out.
I am in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. Yes, that’s right. I’m a born-again Christian that is in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. This is not about how I personally feel about it. This is actually about the fulfillment of God’s Word and the hypocrisy and lack of validity of the arguments against it.
There is only one strictly Biblical argument against same-sex marriage. The Bible says, in a few places, that homosexuality is wrong. There’s Leviticus 18:22, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman,” Romans 1:27, “Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.” However, it also predicts that society will approve of it. In the context of the idea of it being wrong, the Word says that darkness will take over. Isaiah 60:2 says, “For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and deep darkness the people; but the Lord will arise over you, and His glory will be seen upon you.” This can, of course, be applied to many situations going on in the world today.
The obvious argument in favor of same-sex marriage is that it shouldn’t matter who we love and that people should not be treated as second-class citizens based on who they love.
There are, however, other arguments against it. The biggest ones involve so-called sanctity of marriage and preserving so-called traditional marriage. The sanctity of marriage has already been very much damaged. The divorce rate is 50% (and I’ve seen people predict that it won’t be long until newlywed same-sex couples start divorcing, which I find hard to believe) and not only does the media have a tendency to glorify and foster acceptance of divorces by constantly throwing “news” stories out there when celebrities do it, the media has a tendency to glorify infidelity by making “news” stories out of that as well. When you hear the stories of the likes of Bill Clinton, Mark Foley, Mark Sanford, Tiger Woods, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, Donald Trump and probably a whole host of others, you really wonder just how much the “sanctity” of marriage really matters to our society. Someone said to me that just because it’s damaged doesn’t mean it should be abandoned. I’m not saying anything about abandonment. My point is simply that we can’t say that same-sex marriage will be the force that damages the institution because that implies there was no previous damage.
There’s another problem with the “sanctity” of marriage. It’s only in probably the last couple of centuries that marriages occurred out of love and out of a true partnership and commitment between the people involved. Many, many supposedly Christian marriages have been created out of national alliances or for some sort of monetary gain or power play. It’s not sacred when it’s not God joining the two people but external parties doing it for personal gain.
As for traditional marriage, that has already changed over time. Again, we didn’t always have the option of divorce. We once criminalized interracial marriages. Some say the next steps are polygamy and allowing children to get married. Considering the much stronger stigma that is attached to both, I don’t think that’s going to change anytime soon. Our society is largely in favor of same-sex marriage or, even if they’re not okay with it happening, they’re not vehemently opposed to legalization. It is not in favor of polygamy or pedophilia.
A couple of our presidential candidates, at the moment most notably Michelle Bachmann, though Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum have jumped on the bandwagon, favor a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Here is the irony of this. First of all, with the obvious exception of the 3/5 Compromise and other provisions for slavery, when have we ever made discrimination constitutional? That one exception is just that, the single instance of it. Second, Bachmann is touting the right of the states to legalize and in the same breath wants to see this amendment that will override states’ rights. Here’s what Rick Santorum said:
“It’s not that we’re against anybody. People can live the life they want to live,” Santorum insisted. “They can do whatever they want to do in the privacy of their home with respect to that activity.”
“Now you’re talking about changing the laws of the country. And it’s going to have a profound impact on society, on faith, on education. Once people realize that, they say, you know what, we respect people’s right to live the life they want to lead, but don’t try to fundamentally change how society functions by changing that definition.”
And society just won’t function, according to Santorum, if “we lower our sights” for children by “robbing” them of their “best hope, which is a mom and a dad.”
That argument is not as valid as Republicans would like to think. Just because a child is raised by two women or two men at home absolutely does not mean the child will not have both a mother and a father figure. Since when does homosexuality preclude people from having opposite-sex friends? Have they stopped to think that their friends might play a role in raising a child, just as a heterosexual couple’s friends do the same?
The most ridiculous thing about this is that the Republicans are so insistent on less government, smaller government. Wouldn’t the government telling people that they’re not going to tell same-sex couples they can’t get married be the smaller government that conservatives so crave?
This country may have been built on Judeo-Christian principles, but while the majority of citizens may claim to be Christian (and just to be clear, if you’re Catholic, you’re STILL Christian), but many of our Founding Fathers were actually not Christian. Thomas Jefferson, in particular, claimed to prescribe to the morality that Christ taught (we won’t go off on the Sally Hemings tangent) but was a Deist and not Christian. We are a nation built on Christian teachings, but we are not a Christian nation. Freedom of religion was put in the First Amendment for a reason. You have every right to believe what you want but you don’t have the right to make other people think the way you do.
Oh and one more thing before I forget. I think Christians would do well to remember that Jesus taught us to love and not to judge. This issue is one of the bigger thorns in the side of the church. So many people leave the church because they are told they will to go hell for being homosexual, bisexual or transgender. The truth is that we need to love them as they are and maybe these new laws will give us Christians an opportunity to minister, so we can be the light in the darkness the Bible talks about! There is also something else we Christians need to remember. Having seen Facebook statuses saying “The Bible says it’s wrong is not a valid argument” and “I don’t want a non-answer about God and morality,” I have realized that we would simply do well to remember that the Bible doesn’t mean to everyone what it means to us. It’s invalid because it’s not relevant to them as nonbelievers.
I hope I have given you, the reader, something to think about and maybe even shown a little bit that not all Christians are the same.
